with the new lens series from sigma you don´t need canon for that.you can do it yourself.

Which means you don't need to have a camera with AFMA or software like FoCal??

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you use FoCal to estimate the error and then enter that number into the AFMA field of the camera. Now you replace the AFMA of the camera with the lens adjustment but you still need FoCal (or you just use magic lantern and jog the focus around manually).

yogi

I have the sigma 50 1.4 and have been very satisfied and impressed so far. The canon 35L is in my wish list, but if the sigma gets good reviews i might consider it instead, especially considering the price difference.

Sigma 70mm (I-R reference lens) , 105mm , 150mm , 180 macro is also high quality lenses.One big problem with Sigma lenses is that Canon service center will not not adjust the Sigma lenses to the camera body if there are any AF focusing problems .

with the new lens series from sigma you don´t need canon for that.you can do it yourself.

it depends, try to micro adjust a 105 macro or a zoom from the macro mode up to infinity . the best solution is to have all Canon lenses adjusted by a canon service center, a zoom for example 24-105 are adjusted in 8 different positions in the zoom range, in 5dmk2 we have one, and in 5dmk 3 we have 2 adjustments points.

jukka

And when we are discussing AF and micro adjustments , there are minor variations in the AF system, this together with 1. camera AF is incorrectly calibrated 2. the lens AF is incorrectly calibrated 3. Both the camera and the lens is faulty. 4. minor variations, its means, take a series of 5 shoots and place your hand in front of the lens so every shoot against your target will be a new AF measure, then you can se in a series of pictures that the absolute sharpness varies / focusing accuracy and can look like this.Number of incorrect parameters can therefore be many .

it depends, try to micro adjust a 105 macro or a zoom from the macro mode up to infinity . the best solution is to have all Canon lenses adjusted by a canon service center, a zoom for example 24-105 are adjusted in 8 different positions in the zoom range, in 5dmk2 we have one, and in 5dmk 3 we have 2 adjustments points.

Thanks for that info on the 8 different positions at Canon FSC. Did not know that.

I've always wondered about this though. Since AFMA can only be accurately set for one subject distance, is it better to get a lens that has a AFMA of 0 with your body than to adjust a lens to, say, -12 for 25x focal length subject distance?

For that matter, is it even possible to get a lens that focuses perfectly (AFMA=0) for both near & far subject distances?

I would guess so, as AFMA appears to me, in my understanding, to simply be an extra correction factor on top of all other correction factors (e.g. correction due to spherical aberration, etc.; more here: http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=109296); and a simple multiplier (or whatever exactly AFMA is) may not hold across the entire range of subject distances.

I am looking for a prime around here... lets see how the 35 f/2 IS stacks up with it... still, maybe a shorty40 is still the best option? who knows! Too many options drives me mad, but too few is worse!

Sigma are certainly not doing too bad. The original 30mm was one of the greatest lenses ever.

Mine was a dud; poor AF performance and a squeeky focus ring. It did however produce that fabulous bokeh

I now have the Siggy 50/1.4 and 20/1.8. Both of these are fabulous lenses and I have no issues with them whatsoever, they are exemplary copies.

Now for the 35 mm: I had the 35/2 from Canon but it was was an old, second hand copy that was less than stellar. It made me wonder if 35mm really is the focal length for me, but these new lenses make me re-consider.

The first results from both the new Canon 35/2 IS and the Sigma 1.4 seem very good. Price-wise they are roughly in the same ball-park so that makes it very interesting to compare them head-to head. I consider the compactness of the Canon a real advantage though, it doubles as a good low-light lens for travel (the example shots on the Canon website are typically the kind of photo's I'd use this type of lens for).

I am so glad that someone like Roger is raving about this lens:"OK...you can get out your crayons and color me fanboy!"...LOL!..I,was considering waiting 4 the new "rumored" Canon 35mm f/1.4...but I already own the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ( which is a FANTASTCIC alternative to my mostly "L"-Glass quiver in spite of the mixed reviews...GREAT LENS!), but with this praise From Roger and the $899 price tag it will be a joy to purchase this hunk of glass and thumb my nose to Canon's new pricing policies and loooooooooooooong waits for products to come to market. COOL! Immediate cost- saving fun...I LOVE IT!(regarding the above post..I have to agree:as a full-frame shooter, for me...the 35mm certainly cannot replace the 50mm...it is a nice addition to it...and helps me avoid buying the over-priced Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II...Can U say DOUBLE BONUS!).